NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7631715" data-attributes="member: 42582">Not really. Suppose that the first is stated by the GM, the player makes a Resist Passion roll, and fails, and then the GM state the second. How did this situation suddenly change from "test" to "manipulation"?Or to give a different example. The GM has described the dungeon corridor that the PCs are standing in. The player says I walk down the left-hand path, inspecting the ceiling as I go. The GM responds, OK, after about 10' you find yourself falling - that bit of floor was an illusion! Is that "test" or "manipulation"?I wrote the OP, so I can condidently say that you are wrong about this. The OP says nothing in particular about what the mechanics and system conventions might be around establishing true descriptions of PC actions - for instance, what resources might need to be spent in order to be permitted to make a description true. It deliberately and expressly makes the range of possibilities a matter of discussion!I think you may have missed the point of the OP. I described an action - I wink at the maiden, melting her heart - in the course of inviting discussion about how these descriptions of actions might be made true of the fiction. The OP canvsasses decision-making and checks - for D&D players, this at least roughly corresponds to the difference between spell-casting and thief abilities.I don't know why you would equate a player decision-amking ability with bypassing game mechanics.The whole point of the OP was that simply saying The players decide what their PCs do isn't a useful description of any RPG, given that I wink at the maiden, melting her heart is a true description of what a PC does, but isn't something that a player normally has the unfettered power to make true in a RPG.</blockquote>

Verification